Support NeoGAF

[Biker19]

No, it's because the tasks that are executed by the CPU and GPU are not arbitrarily interchangeable. And because the only way you can make up for less memory is more memory.

I am not going to comment on exclusives because they are irrelevant. You either have the same game from the same team under the same conditions and measurable results or you add nothing to the discussion. The measurable results show the 360 is the better hardware. When differences between the two versions resulted in "lazy devs" bad press, developers aimed for parity which results in past Arkham games being almost identical between platforms and somehow this is hilariously ignored for 30 pages now.

Dude, it's a known fact that the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox 360.

PS3:

GPU: 192 GFLOPS
CPU: 230.4 GFLOPS maximum
RAM: 512 MB (shared)

Xbox 360:

GPU: 240 GFLOPS
CPU: 77 GFLOPS maximum
RAM: 512 MB (unified)

The exclusives on PS3 proves that. The hardware on Xbox 360 isn't exactly "better," just better on easier development.

 

[SeventhSon]

Was parity part of your plan?

 

[Melchiah]

As we have learned from AC:Unity, sometimes the PS4 doesn't always perform better. It has become apparent that a CPU intensive game is a PS4 bottleneck and vastly under-performs on the PS4 when compared to the same code on XONE. (based on AC:U DF analysis)

What if Batman is very CPU intensive and, just like like AC:Unity, parity is being enforced to keep the PS4 up to the XONE version?

There are many things that we don't know about the development process of individual titles until we are told by the devs.

To assume that the PS4 is being held back is foolish until we know the facts.

These are from Ubisoft's presentation:

Which should also put this to rest:

No, it's because the tasks that are executed by the CPU and GPU are not arbitrarily interchangeable. And because the only way you can make up for less memory is more memory.

I am not going to comment on exclusives because they are irrelevant. You either have the same game from the same team under the same conditions and measureable results or you add nothing to the discussion. The measureable results show the 360 is the better hardware. When differences between the two versions resulted in "lazy devs" bad press, developers aimed for parity which results in past Arkham games being almost identical between platforms and somehow this is hilariously ignored for 30 pages now.

 

[Biker19]

I didn't hear developers scream parity when the Wii U was struggling along the next gen consoles.

I paid for a console, I expect developers to utilize everything within that console. Once again, the Playstation brand suffers, just this time it's not because it's too difficult to develop for but because... I don't know, why is PARITY an issue NOW?

Did OG Xbox owners demand a better version of PS2 games back in the day?

It's not really a good parallel because the Xbox didn't sell anywhere close to the PS2 so it made sense to focus on the PS2

Which is weird because the PS4 is outselling the Xbone by a considerable amount, if this continues surely it won't make any sense to not focus on the PS4 version of a game

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

At least you don't have to worry about those like Kojima Productions & Square-Enix holding back the PS4 versions of their titles graphically because of the Xbox One versions.

 

[Mitsurugi]

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

At least you don't have to worry about those like Kojima Productions & Square-Enix holding back the PS4 versions of their titles graphically because of the Xbox One versions.

I get this sense too. Maybe MS does a better job cottling/bribing Western developers, maybe it's some screwed up sense of patriotism. Who knows.

 

[Dragonborn]

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

At least you don't have to worry about those like Kojima Productions & Square-Enix holding back the PS4 versions of their titles graphically because of the Xbox One versions.

At this point, that's the only thing that really makes sense outside of MS actively paying/ persuading them to pursue equality. I mean, the X1 install base is small, and it's not growing nearly as fast as the PS4, there's really no reason devs should focus so much on that console unless they're getting something out of it.

Anyways, it's time to accept that MS is going to hold back another gen. PS4 exclusives is going to be where it's at.

 

[Melchiah]

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

At least you don't have to worry about those like Kojima Productions & Square-Enix holding back the PS4 versions of their titles graphically because of the Xbox One versions.

Ubisoft is a French company though.

 

[jelly]

I think it's just publishers logically dictating dev time to save time and money.

The weaker slightly complicated console needs more dev time to reach a performance level which may lead to a more refined outcome as it's a priority to reach a certain standard.

The stronger easier to develop for console gets less dev time as it supposeldy should reach the same or better performance level but time and money isn't spent pushing that much so hope for the best at the cut off point.

I don't think any dev deliberately scuppers the performance of games but the publisher says, job done, move along now once they think it's acceptable.

 

[Endoplasmatisch]

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

At least you don't have to worry about those like Kojima Productions & Square-Enix holding back the PS4 versions of their titles graphically because of the Xbox One versions.

This doesn't make any sense.
But that "logic" japanese Publisher hate Microsofts XBOX ONE, because mgs gz and oes15 is only 720p, which is PATHETIC, when You compare them to Diablo 3, Halo MCC, Destiny... Even GTA V ! is 1080p.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

I think it's just publishers logically dictating dev time to save time and money.

The weaker slightly complicated console needs more dev time to reach a performance level which may lead to a more refined outcome as it's a priority to reach a certain standard.

The stronger easier to develop for console gets less dev time as it supposeldy should reach the same or better performance level but time and money isn't spent pushing that much so hope for the best at the cut off point.

I don't think any dev deliberately scuppers the performance of games but the publisher says, job done, move along now once they think it's acceptable.

That's a backwards way to develop though, especially when a PC version exists.

Surely, it should be a case of setting a budget or a target and working to it and then scaling back to consoles, meaning the PS4 has less scaling back and the XB1 has more (or, if you are concerned about the CPU limitations of both consoles, working on a PS4 version and scaling up on PC and scaling back on XB1). If developers are working from the lowest common denominator and setting that as, not just their base requirement, but as their target, then their priorities are completely wrong.

If parity is so important, why is the PC treated differently?

 

[Metalingus5150]

Because of Ass Creed Unity, people think the PS4 can't keep up with the Xbone now?

 

[lonedigitalwolf]

Because of Ass Creed Unity, people think the PS4 can't keep up with the Xbone now?

Madness i know.

 

[Ateron]

This doesn't make any sense.
But that "logic" japanese Publisher hate Microsofts XBOX ONE, because mgs gz and oes15 is only 720p, which is PATHETIC, when You compare them to Diablo 3, Halo MCC, Destiny... Even GTA V ! is 1080p.

Both PES and MGS run at 720p on the x1 not for lack of power, but the engine itself seems to struggle with the console for some reason. 60fps doesn't come cheap but to witness it in a football game, of all things, spells that the problem is definitely with the engine, not the console itself. And yes, I think that's it's ridiculous and a shame for the x1 owners that they can't get it to run at a higher resolution. The problem will eventually get ironed out, I suppose..

 

[MrMatt555]

This is good news for ps4 owners then?

Spoiler

Joking

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Because of Ass Creed Unity, people think the PS4 can't keep up with the Xbone now?

I think it's more of a case that people are worried developers won't take any care to make sure the PS4 runs properly. A case of "XB1 is done, just slap some code on a PS4 disc and call it a day".

Except, it's just Ubisoft being pathetically bad at game development when it comes to their key franchise.

 

[Endo Punk]

I haven't played Batman since City and as much I want to play as Bats again I have no qualms in skipping it if they don't take advantage of PS4's GPU and consider GPGPU compute for CPU intensive tasks. They should make their game the best they can on consoles, parity just would'nt allow that. Rocksteady are one devs whom I comppletely trust so Im sure they will do right by gamers.

 

[jroc74]

That's a backwards way to develop though, especially when a PC version exists.

Surely, it should be a case of setting a budget or a target and working to it and then scaling back to consoles, meaning the PS4 has less scaling back and the XB1 has more (or, if you are concerned about the CPU limitations of both consoles, working on a PS4 version and scaling up on PC and scaling back on XB1). If developers are working from the lowest common denominator and setting that as, not just their base requirement, but as their target, then their priorities are completely wrong.

If parity is so important, why is the PC treated differently?

I thought about this after bringing up the Wii U.....and over the past few days....I have seriously thought about becoming more of a PC gamer for multi platform games.

I understand with a PC you can upgrade hardware, tweak so many things, so really the PC versions should always be better....just because.

I seriously think more ppl should consider gaming more on their PC's if they dont now.

 

[The Artisan]

Dude, it's a known fact that the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox 360.

PS3:

GPU: 192 GFLOPS
CPU: 230.4 GFLOPS maximum
RAM: 512 MB (shared)

Xbox 360:

GPU: 240 GFLOPS
CPU: 77 GFLOPS maximum
RAM: 512 MB (unified)

The exclusives on PS3 proves that. The hardware on Xbox 360 isn't exactly "better," just better on easier development.

so essentially the Ps3 was 4x as powerful as the 360?

according to technobuffalo though, this power only translated in graphics for processing.

 

[Crisium]

so essentially the Ps3 was 4x as powerful as the 360?

according to technobuffalo though, this power only translated in graphics for processing.

No, not 4x more powerful.

1) GPU matters more for gaming
2) Cell CPU is hard to take advantage off

While GPU matters more, the 360's was only incremental over the PS3. Meanwhile, the PS3's CPU was so much faster than the 360s, that it could take on GPU workload - but only if you could program properly for it. So inexperienced/lazy/cheap devs would treat both consoles with the same CPU instructions, and you were then left with a weaker GPU on the PS3 and thus worse performance. Not to mention the 360's EDRAM which really helped with AA when properly taken advantage of.

But experienced devs would harness the CPU to more than make up for the GPU deficit. Certainly markedly more than the 360 as evidenced by the top PS3 exclusives. I'm not sure you could assign a % to it (even though if you add both together, PS3 comes out 33% more GFLOPS), as it all comes down to how much you can harness the Cell (Naughty Dog seemed to get better each time).

 

[Endoplasmatisch]

Now that is some serious revisionist bullshit there. Microsoft made an announcement that basically fucked over the average consumer for their benefit. They then spread misinformation and straight up lies regarding their hardware. Consumers were irate and Microsoft told them to #dealwithit and buy a 360 if they had an issue with it. It was only after their preorder numbers started to look absolutely atrocious that they altered their policy. To this day the company line is not "sorry, we fucked up" instead it's "well you guys just weren't ready for our brilliant vision of the future so you don't get any of these cool toys that we totally intended to include with it." Their actions, language and messages since have only reaffirmed that they are entirely unapologetic and consistently anti consumer (Indie Parity clause, Tomb Raider "it has a duration," our customers are "first class citizens" ... at the expense of everyone else etc etc). People have every right to be pissed at them for the sort of bullshit they pulled and are, in fact, still pulling.

Just because you have forgiven or overlooked their words, actions and policies does not mean everyone should. Consumer trust has to be earned back. For some it's easier than others. But in no way are those reluctant to trust or support MS being unreasonable.



When a company tries to fuck you over you better believe people will "get mad" and we will stay mad for as long as we damn well choose. Personally I choose to be angry until they stop treating me, as a consumer, like an idiot who can't see through their bullshit. Until they convince me they are trustworthy they don't get my trust back.

What the...? Are you serious? Or is this a joke/sarcasm-post? lol

Micorsoft changed everything BEFORE Launch. So what's the Problem exactly?! Did anyone get hurt or something?
They just didn't know better, they thought People want this. I am going 100% digital, that's why I really liked the original Vision. Some People liked the Vision, but the majority not. That's why they changed the Vision immediately and even before Launch.
It has nothing to do with "fucking over". It was just a misunderstanding.

And do you know what Microsoft did to resolve this problem of "misunderstanding" and not knowing what the customer actually wants? Yeah, Microsoft launched http://xbox.uservoice.com/ and they launched xbox PREVIEW Program, where the Gamers actively give Feedback. You know why? Because micrsoft never wants to misunderstand the gamer again. And when you look at, what they did with the xbox one, monthly updates, Focus on games, getting rid of the gold paywall, droping the Price and kinect. They even fired the xbox Boss! I really like the new direction.

What about sony? Remember: "if the PS3 is too expensive for your broken ass, get a SECOND JOB!" LOL They even LAUNCHED with that Price and that attitude! How long did it sony take to lower the price?

Source: http://www.joystiq.com/2005/07/06/sony-wants-you-to-earn-that-playstation-3/

And what about the PSN HACK? Still, PSN is down like every week.

Nobody is perfect. And regarding Microsoft and their Vision NOBODY GOT HARMED, they released the xbox one without the 24h-check in etc. everything gone. so why are you still mad? Lets just enjoy gaming and great games!

 

[benny_a]

The PS3 and Xbone were not in the same position.

The PS3 BOM was much higher than the retail price. The Xbone BOM was lower than the retail price. Both US, where the retail price is the lowest of the major regions.

And PSN is not down every week. In addition I don't know how much one should credit a company for doing what their competition has done for years before that.

 

[Ursiform]

My theory about this, is that some Western 3rd party publishers hate Nintendo & Sony. With European & Japanese 3rd party publishers, they treat them fairly.

That's the U.S. gaming media for you. Heck, they've been Pro-Microsoft & Pro-Xbox, blatantly defended Microsoft even when their obnoxious policies were brought out within everyone, even those like Edge Magazine & Polygon were highly defending Microsoft before.

Dat persecution complex...

 

[MMaRsu]

So arr they developing on Xbone for main development? Thats the only way to get parity between those games.

 

[Lux R7]

It's OK, I'm buying PC version anyway.
Consoles this gen are only for the exclusives. Period.

this this this.

 

[rossonero]

Couldn't they just mean that both versions will be 1080p30fps but with different graphic fidelity? Or maybe even that the Xbone version will have that dynamic 13somethingx1080 resolution?

 

[MMaRsu]

What the...? Are you serious? Or is this a joke/sarcasm-post? lol

Micorsoft changed everything BEFORE Launch.

Because preorder numbers were terrible and nobody would have bought an Xbox.

So what's the Problem exactly?! Did anyone get hurt or something?
They just didn't know better, they thought People want this. I am going 100% digital, that's why I really liked the original Vision. Some People liked the Vision, but the majority not. That's why they changed the Vision immediately and even before Launch.
It has nothing to do with "fucking over". It was just a misunderstanding.

Lol it wasnt a misunderstanding, they wanted more money and for you to lose the ability to trade games with friends and sell games back without them getting a cut. They wanted to bend you over and fuck you.

If you cant see that you are naive and probably very young and dont have any business sense.

What about sony? Remember: "if the PS3 is too expensive for your broken ass, get a SECOND JOB!" LOL They even LAUNCHED with that Price and that attitude! How long did it sony take to lower the price?

Yup and they got blasted for that with low sales and a bad image as a company. Not many ppl wanted a PS3. But thats something VERY different from taking away your rights.

And what about the PSN HACK? Still, PSN is down like every week.

PSN is hardly ever down. Im taking it you only have an Xbox. And what about the hack?

Nobody is perfect. And nobody got harmed

Yeah nobody got harmed because all gamers everywhere rallied against this fucking bullshit.

Man you are a clueless gamer.

 

[CadetMahoney]

I'm buying PC version anyway.

Consoles this gen are only for the exclusives. Period.

I'm not impressed with their exclusives enough to drop $400 for it either.

 

[EGM1966]

Couldn't they just mean that both versions will be 1080p30fps but with different graphic fidelity? Or maybe even that the Xbone version will have that dynamic 13somethingx1080 resolution?

Probably. I really don't expect a tech disaster like Unity. I'm comfortable Rocksteady will deliver a very good game on console as they've done before.

If they aim for parity we'll get a good looking game with PS4 somewhat under-utilised but nothing I'm going to be upset about.

Would I prefer no parity and something like DA Inquisition approach? Sure. But I can live with a solid nice looking game a'la say Destiny.

Unity is a technical mess and I wouldn't draw conclusions about a Rocksteady game from that sorry situation personally.

 

[Mastperf]

What the...? Are you serious? Or is this a joke/sarcasm-post? lol

Micorsoft changed everything BEFORE Launch. So what's the Problem exactly?! Did anyone get hurt or something?
They just didn't know better, they thought People want this. I am going 100% digital, that's why I really liked the original Vision. Some People liked the Vision, but the majority not. That's why they changed the Vision immediately and even before Launch.
It has nothing to do with "fucking over". It was just a misunderstanding.

And do you know what Microsoft did to resolve this problem of "misunderstanding" and not knowing what the customer actually wants? Yeah, Microsoft launched http://xbox.uservoice.com/ and they launched xbox PREVIEW Program, where the Gamers actively give Feedback. You know why? Because micrsoft never wants to misunderstand the gamer again. And when you look at, what they did with the xbox one, monthly updates, Focus on games, getting rid of the gold paywall, droping the Price and kinect. They even fired the xbox Boss! I really like the new direction.

What about sony? Remember: "if the PS3 is too expensive for your broken ass, get a SECOND JOB!" LOL They even LAUNCHED with that Price and that attitude! How long did it sony take to lower the price?

Source: http://www.joystiq.com/2005/07/06/sony-wants-you-to-earn-that-playstation-3/

And what about the PSN HACK? Still, PSN is down like every week.

Nobody is perfect. And regarding Microsoft and their Vision NOBODY GOT HARMED, they released the xbox one without the 24h-check in etc. everything gone. so why are you still mad? Lets just enjoy gaming and great games!

Sony lost a massive amount of money and took years of backlash fixing the PS3. The fact that you reduce what MS tried to do down to a "misunderstanding" is ridiculous and falls right in line with MS claiming people just didn't understand their great vision. They still launched a $500 console with an expensive peripheral most people didn't want. Some of their decisions like underpowered hardware were unfixable and will drag down 3rd party titles for every system this gen. The bottom line for many is the fact that MS was so out of touch that they actually thought the original XB1 plan was a good idea. I personally owned a 360 since day and invested heavily in their ecosystem, but I have absolutely no faith in a company that clearly had no idea what most people wanted in a console.

 

[oldergamer]

Because preorder numbers were terrible and nobody would have bought an Xbox.

... and the point is why do you give a shit for the reason MS changed what they were doing ? Why do you keep focusing on something not relevant anymore. Yes they had a reason for changing all those policies and firing the head of the xbox division. It should be more important that they changed those policies prior to launching.

Lol it wasnt a misunderstanding, they wanted more money and for you to lose the ability to trade games with friends and sell games back without them getting a cut. They wanted to bend you over and fuck you.

That's your opinion, but I was of the opinion for years that the used games market was bad for the console business. Gamestops and EB's sold used games for close to the price of new games while basically giving the consume reselling them peanuts. At least the proposed changes to restricting how used games were sold, should have netted people more money per game, and the developers a cut in that as well. The thing that sucked IMO was you couldn't just loan a game to people without a hassle among other restritions.

If you cant see that you are naive and probably very young and dont have any business sense.... Man you are a clueless gamer.

I think he's far less clueless then you are. You're using old arguments to avoid looking for value in the consoles. you're using old arguments and silly reasoning to support your console of choice. My xbox one sat for a good 9 months before I started getting value out of it. I wouldn't have bought one if MS didn't change the BS policies before launch, and the DID.

Just like with the ps3, I bought one and didn't care about the BS sony pushed on prices or fake renders of games, or whatever... ( and launched with) that's your mistake.

 

[Stevey]

Looks like I'll definitely be getting this on PC, which was the plan all along to be honest.

 

[UrbanRats]

It's OK, I'm buying PC version anyway.
Consoles this gen are only for the exclusives. Period.

Same.
But really, not everyone wants 40 different gaming boxes around.

 

[DustyVonEric]

Because of Ass Creed Unity, people think the PS4 can't keep up with the Xbone now?

Madness i know.

I'd be kind of upset if I was Sony. Because Ubi released some broken garbage, some might use that as a benchmark for each consoles strength. I've seen it already on Gaf even.

"What if it was the PS4 holding back the XB1 version because of the slower CPU?".

"Maybe x game (think it was Batman AK) is a CPU intensive game?"

Well, Sony's also at fault for letting this game on their system in this state. Where was "For the Gamers" when that decision was made?

Realistically, I get Sony doesn't want to tick off Ubi. But does Ubi really want to upset Sony with their early sales advantage? It's a two-way street, right?

 

[KageMaru]

Resolution and frame rate parity don't have to be bad things. If they could get the XBO version to run at 1080p30 for example, good for them. However I would hope we see other advantages on the PS4 such as higher quality shadows, better AA, better filtering, or higher quality post process effects. Just something to show the extra GPU power in the PS4 isn't being ignored.

I think too many people associate resolution/frame rate parity with all things being equal and that doesn't have to be true. There is much more to the graphical makeup of a game other than resolution and frame rate.

I wish Sony required devs to add extra graphical polish to the PS4 versions, similar to what MS did for the OG Xbox against the PS2 (IIRC). Though I understand that games are much more expensive to produce now, so that may not be a viable option.

 

[Palpable]

Why was there no parity last gen?

Damn good question. Rocksteady just shot themselves in the foot. Foolish to even contemplate console parity for you game.

 

[The Strokes]

.

So now is not only The One but now it's also the Vision :lol

I'm sorry man, but you're naive if you think it was just a misunderstanding on MS behalf. Just remember that even with the backlash they still tried to stick to their vision sending information to outlets and customers as to how their "vision" worked. They did it for their interests, not yours or mine as consumers.

Sony is a shitty company as well but hey, at least they knew how to play their Cards right (based on previous bad experiences, no doubt)

 

[LAA]

I'm usually pretty vocal against this shit, but this ain't Ubi we're talking about. I believe they will do right by the consumers.There's more to a game than res and fps. The two games may run at the same res and fps, but the power differential PS4 benefits from may translate into more stable fps (a huge plus in my book), better effects, less pop in, better AA...let's wait a while before we crucify them. If this was a ubisoft game I would be pissed already (as it stands, I lost all hope for the division, FC4 is still a mystery to me as well), but it isn't. Rocksteady are better devs than Ubi studios. I don't think they will stand for that bs tactics.

Yeah, I trust Rocksteady a lot more than Ubi, so I do expect better of them...
Hoping they clarify what they mean about parity exactly soon.

 

[panty]

I'm a PS4 owner that's fine with this. I have zero doubt that it'll be a great-looking game on both platforms.

Because of people like you we have these issues.

People get so caught up in the minutiae of these Digital Foundry comparisons that they forget that Xbox One games still look really damn good.

They still look worse than the PS4 versions.

 

[Ursiform]

Anyways, it's time to accept that MS is going to hold back another gen.

This thread delivers. Xbone so bad that it's rewriting history, confirmed.

 

[Death³]

Dude, it's a known fact that the PS3 is more powerful than the Xbox 360.

Hahaha ... no.

PS3:

GPU: 192 GFLOPS

I have an idea, why don't you quote the megahertzes next time you want to explain why one machine is more powerful than the other? That would be even funnier.

The exclusives on PS3 proves that.

Yeah, why use the documented advantage hundreds of third party games have on 360 as a measurement stick, when you can cherry pick five games with imaginary advantages?

The hardware on Xbox 360 isn't exactly "better," just better on easier development.

Says who? Apart from Sony PR that is...

But let's just say Sony PR is right and the Xbox 360 is just easier to develop for. This doesn't change the fact that third parties could get better results on 360 compared to PS3 if they made the same investment in time and money in both platforms. My question: Why is there parity between the versions of past Arkham games? Why doesn't anyone cry about that?

 

[Pankratous]

Hahaha ... no.



I have an idea, why don't you quote the megahertzes next time you want to explain why one machine is more powerful than the other? That would be even funnier.



Yeah, why use the documented advantage hundreds of third party games have on 360 as a measurement stick, when you can cherry pick five games with imaginary advantages?



Says who? Apart from Sony PR that is...

But let's just say Sony PR is right and the Xbox 360 is just easier to develop for. This doesn't change the fact that third parties could get better results on 360 compared to PS3 if they made the same investment in time and money in both platforms. My question: Why is there parity between the versions of past Arkham games? Why doesn't anyone cry about that?

Its pretty much a recognised fact that the PS3 was a fair bit (not significantly) more powerful than Xbox 360, however it was extremely difficult to code for due to the CELL architecture.

This is what is known by everyone. Your posts looks desperate.

 

[Poetic.Injustice]

Hahaha ... no.



I have an idea, why don't you quote the megahertzes next time you want to explain why one machine is more powerful than the other? That would be even funnier.



Yeah, why use the documented advantage hundreds of third party games have on 360 as a measurement stick, when you can cheronry pick five games with imaginary advantages?



Says who? Apart from Sony PR that is...

But let's just say Sony PR is right and the Xbox 360 is just easier to develop for. This doesn't change the fact that third parties could get better results on 360 compared to PS3 if they made the same investment in time and money in both platforms. My question: Why is there parity between the versions of past Arkham games? Why doesn't anyone cry about that?

Banned eh?

 

[Eusis]

Says who? Apart from Sony PR that is...

But let's just say Sony PR is right and the Xbox 360 is just easier to develop for. This doesn't change the fact that third parties could get better results on 360 compared to PS3 if they made the same investment in time and money in both platforms. My question: Why is there parity between the versions of past Arkham games? Why doesn't anyone cry about that?

A key part is that the PS3 wasn't stronger where it mattered more (GPU) and that for quite awhile GPUs were infinitely more important for gaming than CPU, though CPU can definitely be a bottle neck. Also if it's hard to actually get ahead with what power the PS3 has then there's little reason to bother working for that versus achieving parity on both and calling it a day. In contrast the PS4 is roughly the same type of hardware the XB1 has, just higher quality (and no ESRAM, not that it needs it 90%+ of the time... kind of like the CPU power wasn't a meaningful boost over the 360 90%+ of the time), so it should come more or less naturally to outperform the XB1, much like when using a higher end variation of a video card over a lower end one such as the Geforce GTX 980 over the 970. You need to either max out performance (or close enough) on the 970 or actively hold the game back to not make it look better on the 980.

By that same token that'll be how people won't mind as much, if Rocksteady gets, say, 1080p on both at a more or less locked 30 fps then it doesn't matter as much because we've seen many games fall short of 60 fps and so they won't be happy anyway, and frankly unless it's a relatively empty open world like MGSV's is it's unrealistic to expect that in an open world game anyway. And unlocking the fps isn't inherently desirable to a lot of people.

Banned eh?

And right when I was replying. Whoops.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Parity is apparently a real thing.

 

[nelsonroyale]

Resolution and frame rate parity don't have to be bad things. If they could get the XBO version to run at 1080p30 for example, good for them. However I would hope we see other advantages on the PS4 such as higher quality shadows, better AA, better filtering, or higher quality post process effects. Just something to show the extra GPU power in the PS4 isn't being ignored.

I think too many people associate resolution/frame rate parity with all things being equal and that doesn't have to be true. There is much more to the graphical makeup of a game other than resolution and frame rate.

I wish Sony required devs to add extra graphical polish to the PS4 versions, similar to what MS did for the OG Xbox against the PS2 (IIRC). Though I understand that games are much more expensive to produce now, so that may not be a viable option.

I agree with this. I think devs should make 1080/30 the baseline for games on both systems if they can, but then provide higher quality effect, shadows etc on PS4. I know this can't always be the case, but res and fps are definitely not the only variables...

 

[mejin]

Parity is apparently a real thing.

Few games, most multis are always better on PS4.

 

[Eusis]

I agree with this. I think devs should make 1080/30 the baseline for games on both systems if they can, but then provide higher quality effect, shadows etc on PS4. I know this can't always be the case, but res and fps are definitely not the only variables...

This is true, but I do feel like that's increasingly becoming a more and more subtle advantage games can have, not that I wouldn't go for the version that looked better if I had all the right hardware so long as there wasn't some hangup in the way (IE having the 360 D-Pad to defaulting to PS3 for platforms and to a lesser extent thanks to alternate dedicated pads/sticks fighting games.)

Though by the same proxy I think this is probably where parity is usually broken: NFS:Rivals is 1080p/30fps on both, but has better shadows as I recall on PS4, and in inverse AC:U DOES generally provide a higher framerate on XB1, even if that's kind of a case of "no one wins" in my mind.

 

[Ursiform]

Its pretty much a recognised fact that the PS3 was a fair bit (not significantly) more powerful than Xbox 360, however it was extremely difficult to code for due to the CELL architecture.

This is what is known by everyone. Your posts looks desperate.

It is known, Khaleesi.

PS4 is really buffing the crap out the PS3.

 

[Zil33184]

It is known, Khaleesi.

PS4 is really buffing the crap out the PS3.

What are you talking about? Cell used to be PS3's secret sauce. Now that Sony dropped it for x86 everyone's shitting on it.

It's also kinda sad to see BF4 on PS3 beating the 360 version when nobody cares about last gen anymore.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Was parity part of your plan?

Of course! We had to know what the gamers would debate about online.